Navigation

The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us.

Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help end theism, dogma, violence, hatred, and other irrationality. Buy an Xbox 360 -- PS3 -- Laptop -- Apple

Sure he was wrong with the whole "rights come from God, not the state thing"

But seriously ruling against a 'moment of silence' WTF? Am I missing something here?

And the things he said against atheists getting their panties in a bunch about prayer, isn't really different from what I've seen from atheists saying Theists get their panties in a bunch about so called 'blasphemy'.

Regarding your recent clip about atheism and your interview with James Dobson, am I to understand that you believe your tone, your words, and your portrayal of atheists counts as news and not blatant bigotry? Please imagine a clip with exactly the same tone and demeanor, but with the subject, "Blacks," or "homosexuals," or "Muslims." Would it still be ok?

Is bigotry ok so long as you have a 90% majority who agree with it?

Shame on you and your organization for promoting bigotry and hate and calling it news.

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

So he equates non-belief with "worshiping a broom". If I'm not mistaken, Beck is a mormon. Honestly, worshiping a broom makes far more sense than believing your god cursed some transatlantic Israelites with red skin, and thought blacks were inferior until the early 1970's, and will one day make you a god with your own universe to play around in.

This is not, and never was a nation under god, certainly not the blatantly fabricated god of convicted fraudster Joseph Smith. How is requiring "under god" in the Pledge not forcing god down the throats of non-believers?

"Are the children of atheists so fragile, that the idea of prayer can warp their minds?" Is your god so fragile that you have to ask us to "leave god alone"?

Why does there have to be an officially sanctioned "moment of silence" in public schools, funded by the taxes of believers and non-believers alike? Kids can pray anytime they want while they're in school without getting in the other kids' faces. Why does everyone have to be forced to acknowledge that some of the kids might be praying at a specific time of the school day? If they're going to explicitly include prayer as one of the possible activities for the moment of silence, they should also explicitly include as possible activities reflecting on the illogicality of god and the lack of historical evidence for jesus.

Did I just hear Dobson misquote the Constitution when referring to rights "endowed by the Creator"? Are these people so ignorant they can't tell the DoI and Constitution apart?

Dobson mentions his conversation with Ted Bundy, and draws the correlation between pornography and the role it played in his becoming a serial killer. Well and good. What bearing has this on prayer in the schools?

The BTK killer was a committed family man and highly esteemed member of his church. Correlation, anyone?

Our rights do not come from God or the state, which his is trying to make a falacious battle out of. OUR RIGHTS COME FROM THE CONSTITUTION! Bingo, my rights do not come from Jesus, or Allah, or Vishnu. My rights come from Jefferson, Washington, Ben ect ect ect.

"God" and the belief thereof or any god, is protected NOT PROMOTED, NOT FAVORING ONE OVER ALL OTHERS. Merely the right to one's own concious, AS PROTECTED BY "FREEDOM OF RELIGION" Christians falsely take this as intitlement that Jesus, and not the founders, wrote our constitution so therefor only they are intitled to gang tag government proprety and hijack public settings to promote Christianity as "WINK WINK" the "official unoffical" religion of the governement.

Beck falsely lies to his audiance about "under God" and doesn't bother to tell them that the original pledge, first, was not written for the nation, but a boys club, in 1892. When it was adapted by the country as a pledge, IT DID NOT CONTAIN THE WORDS "UNDER GOD".

And to Beck, what the heck was that crap throwing "Bundy" in right after talking about atheists? You must think your viewers are that brain dead, or at least you hope they are.

That wasn't even a slick move and that crap makes you look like a clown.

TO FOX VIEWERS, Beck must think your brain is mush to attempt to equate atheists to cerial killers. If that is the case then our U.K. friends whose population is mostly atheists, must be filling the atlantic with the blood of skantaly clad women.

He wants you to hate us, that means you have to become enimies with the U.K. too.

Message to atheists, "If you don't pray and you read porn you will become a cerial killer"

Theocrats must be really desperate to put out such garbage like this.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."ObamaCheck out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

Didn't Dobson notice Ted Bundy praying (hands folded) during the interview. Bundy was trying anything he could think of to avoid exicution. Don't those two fuck ups remember Bundy proposeing to his girlfriend under croos examination--actually redirect-- and then asking his trial judge to perform the cerimony (the judge did).

Beck and Dobson: one of the better comedy teams since Comfort & Cameron.

Beck thinks that video taping a toddler crying is "proof" : Proof of what ; exploiting children for godly purposes, where I live it is called child-abuse.

If they're going to explicitly include prayer as one of the possible activities for the moment of silence, they should also explicitly include as possible activities reflecting on the illogicality of god and the lack of historical evidence for jesus.

Well said, Zarathustra. QFT.

I discovered on reading further the statute was actually called "The Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act" and that in 2007 they added "shall" to the wording, making it, basically, a mandatory event, all kids were required to participate in what was, ostensibly, time set aside for prayer OR religious contemplation. I would object to it too, I wouldn't want my kids forced upon to reassess their religious standing under unchecked influence on a daily basis.

I started to compose an email only to come to a rather bitter conclusion about midway through. This man simply doesn’t possess the mental faculties necessary to even understand my objections. (Or anyone else’s for that matter.)

As through a glass darkly you seek yourself,
But the light grows weak while under Yggdrasil. --clutch

What was the deal with throwing Bundy into the mix, anyhow? What does pornography have to do with prayer? But since they brought up Bundy, do either of them realize that when he was 3 he woke his aunt up by standing over her on her bed and that he had surrounded her with knives? I don't think that porn had warped his fragile little mind at aqe three. It is also ironic that Bundy was a Mormon. Wonder if either of them were aware of that little tidbit. Probably not. Fanatics have little use for silly things like facts.

It takes a village to raise an idiot.

Save a tree, eat a vegetarian.

Sometimes " The Majority " only means that all the fools are on the same side.

What about the law that was rejected? If it only talked about a moment of silence, then I don't think I would be opposed to it.

Quote:

I discovered on reading further the statute was actually called "The Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act" and that in 2007 they added "shall" to the wording, making it, basically, a mandatory event, all kids were required to participate in what was, ostensibly, time set aside for prayer OR religious contemplation.

Oh, I see.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare

And on a related note, you and I are not allowed to disscuss the Super Bowl and god boy's loss without the express written permission of the NFL.

WHAT THE F? It is fair use to criticise something, and of course any atheist seing that video is going to object to it. That website does not own a monopoly on criticising bigotry nor do they own a copywrite on criticising bigotry.

That would be like Malcom X and Martain Luther King sueing each other over who was first in standing up to white people.

They need to realize that WE as atheists are all in this together and WE need to fight their bigotry together. This is bullcrap on their part and quite petty.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."ObamaCheck out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

I've been called out for noticing this video at Atheist Nexus and not mentioning it. With all due respect, Atheist Nexus noticed this video before me.

Damn, it's annoying what people claim as intellectual property.

LOL, a call to arms (or pens as it were) is not intellectual property, Nexus is being silly, Hamby. Does your blog response bear uncanny similarities to theirs, I mean for example, the same words in the same sentences? Unless you have actually plagiarised their blogs or written work you haven't stepped over any bounds here. Calling common interest folk to rally is anyone's public right, noone owns this idea and that is just common sense.

Edit: Oh I see you copy/pasted the list of email addresses with formatting, I suppose it's in their interests to mention that to you, but it's barely a case for intellectual property claims. It still stands that they can't claim rallying as intellectual property, it's not an original idea at all, let alone one that belongs to Atheist Nexus.

Yeah. I can't think of many things sillier than that. I mean, hell. If they wanted me to plug Atheist Nexus, I would have done it, but calling me out on my blog and accusing me of cut/paste plagiarism? For three email addresses?

I'm continually amazed at how many people get their knickers all twisted over really silly things. Again, if he'd have just sent me a polite email asking me to link to them, I'd have done it. I mean, Geez... how about.. Thanks, Hamby, for helping us spread the word! Would you mind throwing us a shout out for compiling those three email addresses? Thanks again, and GO TEAM!

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

Agreed. Fox News is simply the Al-Jazeera for Christian fundamentalists.

They are just jelous that they have a pesky Constitution preventing them from locking us up. I'm sure Glen dreams of a day when he can ammend the Constitution with a blasphemy law banning any critics of Jesus. If he doesn't he's got me fooled with these packages trying to make us look like babby eaters.

It is so obvious that the hinges are comming off the right wing movement and they don't even see that they are behaiving in the same dogmatic tribalistic way the Taliban is. The only thing preventing them from acting on their thoughts and wishes that we would shut up, is OUR Constitution.

THANK YOU THOMAS JEFFERSON!

I bet it burns right wingers that I value and use the Constitution.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."ObamaCheck out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37

What really burns my ass is how he repeatedly twists facts and deliberately makes claims that aren't factual, but are put forth as such.

1) He points out that it's one nation "under god," as if he isn't aware that that phrase wasn't added to the pledge until well into the 20th century.

2) He repeatedly claims that the ruling made it "unconstitutional to pray in school." No, jackass, you can pray in school whenever you want. You can pray in the morning, at lunch, before your test, etc. What you CAN'T do, and is the reason this moronic piece of legislation was shot down, is force public schools to set aside an indeterminate length of time(how long is a moment, exactly?) for suggested activities including prayer.

3) He mocks atheists for being too "fragile" to handle a little prayer in school? What a hypocritical douchebag. I'll remember this the next time some religious icon is used in a controversial art exhibit, or when some smart-ass successfully lobbies to have a festivus display in the state capitol building. (I love my home state!)

4) I would suggest Dobson get better briefings before he comes on these shows, but it wouldn't matter since his flock of cheeba monkeys accept anything he says at face value because they're intellectually lazy and spineless. Dobson makes a claim that it's not about prayer. It's not? Maybe you should read as far in as THE FUCKING TITLE OF THE LEGISLATION before sticking your foot in your mouth, Jim. Stupid old imbecile.

5) I love how these two buffoons ask the rhetorical question of , "If rights don't come from god, then where do they come from?" They are, of course, assuming that it's THEIR god that grants the rights, not, say, the Muslim god. Does any of them want to go to Syria, or Iran and see how the whole "right come from god" thing works there?

6) Lastly, using a sociopath with a death sentence as proof that their views on pornography are valid? Priceless, I cant believe they kept straight faces during that part of the segment.

Glen Beck say stupid things. It sells comercials. It doesn't matter if you send him a nasty e-mail. If you want to hit him where it hurts write down all his sponsers when watching his show. Send them an e-mail telling them why you are no longer buying their products.

90% of Americans believe in a deity (Repeated twice by the anchor for effect, demonstrating that this was not merely a slip-up)

The most recent online Harris poll found that 73% of responders held belief in some form of deity, 11% of responders claimed to have no belief and 16% claimed agnosticism on the matter (they were unsure).

The anchor was off by a margin of 23%. To put this in proper perspective, America is populated by some 304,000,000 people; Beck incorrectly attributed his beliefs to some 69,920,000 people.

America is 'One Nation Under God'

Constitutionally inaccurate. America is legally bound to no religion; the constitution in the USA clearly states that the country is not sectarian.

A court ruled that the word 'Prayer' cannot be used in school anymore, 'Because it makes the children cry'

Inaccurate portrayal of the case in question. A court ruled that the school could not enforce a mandatory time slot devoted to prayer, as such an action would be sectarian. Children or teachers who wish to pray are not legally gagged in any way from doing so by this ruling - the school is simply not allowed to mandate prayers for all of it's students & faculty.

The activity was not 'optional' as the anchor describes it.

James Dobson is an expert in the field of psychology and a certified doctor (implied)

James Dobson is a fraudster with an illegitimate PhD he claims he was awarded from the University of South Carolina (the University has no record of Dobson's attendence and Dobson has refused to release his transcripts).

He should not be promoted as an expert.

The Founding Fathers reflected that human rights were divinely appointed and were thus universal/inalieable

Inaccurate romancing and theocratizing of the founding fathers of the United States. Note that the rights in the constitution were at first only extended in their fullest to caucasian males, that almost none of the founding fathers supported a sectarian governing body and that the constitution does not mention human rights as divinely endowed.

Ted Bundy confessed to killing to 28 women, killed over 100 women total, was addicted to pornography and his addiction to pornography enabled his behavior

Ted Bundy (a mormon) eventually confessed to arguably 30 murders, though the number is disputed because Bundy would rarely keep a given affirmation consistent. Evidence and corroborating testimony puts the number of victimized women at Bundy's hands at 21 (from 1973 to 1978):

1. Joni Lenz (psuedonym) (survived)

2. Lynda Ann Healy

3. Donna Gail Manson

4. Susan Elaine Rancourt

5. Roberta Kathleen Parks

6. Brenda Carol Ball

7. Georgeann Hawkins

8. Janice Ann Ott

9. Nancy Wilcox

10. Melissa Smith

11. Laura Aime

12. Carol DaRonch (survived)

13. Debra Kent

14. Caryn Campbell

15. Julie Cunningham

16. Denise Oliverson

17. Lynette Culver

18. Susan Curtis

19. Lisa Levy

20. Cheryl Thomas (survived)

21. Kimberly Leach

Ted Bundy achieved notoriety for his murders not through the number of them he committed, but through the shock that someone of his status and apparent disposition could do the callous things he did (many of his victims he approached while feigning injury in order to gain their trust through sympathy). 100 murders is an absurdly high estimate; not single source supports that number.

Pornography was not linked to Bundy's murders by any professional investigator or criminal psychologist. As early as 3 Ted showed signs of sociopathy (surrounding an aunt's bed with knives), and the overwhelming consensus among investigators was that Bundy selected his targets based on physical similarities to Stephanie Brooks (Bundy himself dismissed the idea; of course, Bundy was also the pathological liar and sociopath who committed the deeds, so admitting his own public opinions on his motives as evidence is a bit odd).

Now then. My opinion:

Not one part of this lie-ridden program can be argued as being 'news'. At best it is merely a slanderous editorial piece. Fox News should be held legally accountable for willfully spreading disinformation (an activity known as 'fraud') - I'm sick of them getting away with this.

I wish I had the legal know-how to file a formal legal complaint against them. If anyone does have the know-how, a PM would be appreciated.

Quote:

"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

Just our of curiosity, did they ban moments of silence altogether or are they still allowed on certain days like remembrance day? And don't kids have enough free time with 2 recesses and lunch? could they pray then if they really wanted to?

Anyway, who wants to help me do a study of the effects of homosexuals on children. If that video taught be anything I expect the child's head to explode the they even got close.

James Dobson is an expert in the field of psychology and a certified doctor (implied)

James Dobson is a fraudster with an illegitimate PhD he claims he was awarded from the University of South Carolina (the University has no record of Dobson's attendence and Dobson has refused to release his transcripts).

Here they state that he got a PhD in child development from University of Southern California in 1967. I don't know how to actually verify that. Where to get the thesis, transcripts etc. Someone knows how to do that?

Other than that, on his long list of "accomplishments", the only ones that aren't from an obviously biased source (christian/pro life) are:

Former Associate Clinical Professor of Pediatrics, University of Southern California School of Medicine

Former Attending Staff, Children's Hospital of Los Angeles, Division of Child Development and Medical Genetics

Here they state that he got a PhD in child development from University of Southern California in 1967. I don't know how to actually verify that. Where to get the thesis, transcripts etc. Someone knows how to do that?

Normally, thesises are published and available in the university library. Transcripts can't be released without his permission. Isn't forgery like this a crime?